Richard Glossip is scheduled to return to an Oklahoma County courtroom on Sept. 28 for a third murder trial, more than a year after the U.S. Supreme Court threw out the conviction that had kept him on death row for decades. A state judge set the date after declining a defense request to dismiss the case for insufficient evidence, the Associated Press reported.
Oklahoma prosecutors accuse Glossip of arranging the 1997 killing of motel owner Barry Van Treese. Justin Sneed, a motel maintenance worker who admitted beating Van Treese with a baseball bat, testified that Glossip offered payment for the killing. Sneed received life without parole, while Glossip was convicted and sentenced to death. Glossip has consistently maintained his innocence.
A trial shaped by a constitutional violation
The retrial follows the Supreme Court's 2025 decision that Glossip's earlier prosecution violated due process. In its opinion, the court concluded prosecutors failed to correct testimony they knew was false concerning Sneed's psychiatric treatment. Because Sneed was the only witness who directly tied Glossip to a murder-for-hire agreement, the majority found a reasonable likelihood that the false testimony affected the verdict.
The ruling did not declare Glossip innocent or bar Oklahoma from prosecuting him again. It vacated the judgment and ordered a new trial. Attorney General Gentner Drummond agreed that the prior conviction could not stand, but his office chose to continue the first-degree murder case. Drummond has said the state will not seek the death penalty at the retrial, a decision summarized by the Death Penalty Information Center.
What changes when proceedings begin
Glossip will enter the trial from outside prison. Oklahoma County District Judge Natalie Mai granted him a $500,000 bond in May, subject to monitoring and other conditions. In the bail order, the judge emphasized both the state's obligation to prosecute the case rigorously and the defense's opportunity to present its challenge in a trial free of the errors identified by the Supreme Court.
The central practical issue will be how prosecutors present a case that still depends heavily on Sneed while accounting for the credibility evidence withheld or misstated in the earlier proceeding. The defense is expected to press the lack of physical evidence directly connecting Glossip to the killing and to scrutinize Sneed's account, while prosecutors retain the burden of proving every element beyond a reasonable doubt.
The proceedings also carry institutional weight for Oklahoma. Glossip faced nine execution dates and came within hours of execution in 2015 before officials halted it amid concerns over the state's lethal-injection protocol. The retrial will not revisit the constitutionality of capital punishment, because death is no longer a possible sentence in this case. It will instead test whether the state can obtain a murder conviction under ordinary trial safeguards after the nation's highest court found the previous verdict constitutionally unreliable.
Jury selection and pretrial motions may affect how quickly evidence begins. Until a new verdict is reached, Glossip remains accused, not convicted, in the pending case.
